Saturday, April 14, 2007

News In Brief (And The Usual Opinionated Commentary)

This week has seen the firestorm of the Imus affair overshadow other significant stories with the potential for more long-term impact on people's lives. I cannot think of a time when a story has gripped the media, activist leaders, and people in general more than other events (that normally would have received top-bill, or at least a far more prominent place in the pecking order of stories, covered by the usual suspects).

While the hypocrites like Al Sharpton were busy turning this into the circus that it eventually became, some other stories were overlooked:

"On May 1 we are going to take control of the oil fields," Chavez said. "I'm sure no transnational company is going to draw a shotgun, but we will go with the armed forces and the people."

If I were the oil companies, I'd be tempted to use a scorched earth policy. Oil companies have invested heavily in this exploration and development. They put up the capital, the time, the labor, and for some thug like Chavez to wrest it by force, is theft. We would see how innovative Hugo would be with no process to make the tar-like crude, usable and ready for sale. Burn it to the ground, I say. They are going to lose it all, anyway.

Exiled tycoon Boris Berezovsky, a onetime Kremlin power broker-turned-fierce critic of Russian President Vladimir V. Putin, in remarks published Friday called for the use of "force" to change Russia's government.

Give credit for some guts. After many of those critical of Putin have mysteriously managed to get dead, he comes right out, announces his wishes and possible intentions. But, if I were him, I would not have said anything to the media, just yet. All that have been meaning to tell Boris they love him, had better do it soon.

In all cases of controversy, there are death threats. It may be deplorable, but it happens more times than reported. Big stories that get this amount of coverage, always have a way of flushing out kooks and despicable bastards. There is no need to make this some big deal in the press, other than to generate more sympathy for a cause already won. Other than to do what they're doing (which is to increase security and keep a paper trail of all threats), there's not much else you can do. By making this known publicly, they only risk more.

Now that Imus has been fired, now that Imus has met with the ones that have the right to be the maddest, it should be going away. Right? Yet somehow the skeptic in me says that Al may try to keep this going longer, by doing what he does best (by making himself the focus of attention).

This is nothing new. Media Matters is but one watchdog agency that have become a large component in this whole concept, known as the thought police. Now they are targeting others they disagree with. They will not stop until they purge the airwaves of them. So you see? There really is a slippery slope.

There's more, but that's all we have time for right now. Until next time.

//Notice Rhandi Rhodes and some of the other Air America jocks aren't mentioned. Rhodes staged mock executions of Bush on her show.//

But AC, that was comedy and wasn't directed at a black person. Sharpton and Jackson do not have time to cry out for that kind of remark. It's the racial ones that keep them in fine suits and eating well. They, like Madison Avenue, use target audiences and demographics that will keep money flowing their way.

I remember Michael Graham. He's working now, isn't he? Imus will be back too. If not, it will be of his choosing and he will live well.

But, there is a dangerous trend developing here that really reminds me of the old Soviet style censorship, and it's just around the corner. If we are not alert to the signs and symptoms of such, it will take us, unaware.

As I said, Media Matters is but one way the thought police can shut down free speech, by wearing down the system with frivolous complaints to the point that people give in just to shut them up.

LA, not that I have any intention of defending Sharpton or Jackson here (I find them repulsive when not funny). But, you may be mistaking "bowing to PC reactions" for Soviet style censorship. I don't see any similarity (in the Soviet case, don't you have the State initiative to censor, punish, etc?). Maybe BeingHad can share his thoughts.

Patriot Act (certain provisions of it at the least) is what reminds me of the Soviets.

//you may be mistaking "bowing to PC reactions" for Soviet style censorship. I don't see any similarity (in the Soviet case, don't you have the State initiative to censor, punish, etc?).//

I would certainly agree that this hardly is similar to Stalinism. But, my fear is that this whole notion of "right and wrong thinking" could lead to purges of those that think wrongly. After all, who is going to decide what is right and what is wrong? When we do that, we whittle away at freedom of speech. Do this slowly enough and the people do not notice it and it becomes accepted.

Remember, freedom of speech was conceived to protect unpopular speech. Not the other way around.

//Remember, freedom of speech was conceived to protect unpopular speech. Not the other way around.//

Right. But, seeing all the ridicule Sharpton & Jesse is getting (e.g., SNL, late night talk shows on network TV, ...), I kinda think that the mainstream America is not completely knocked out senseless.

I see them as bringing a lot of this ridicule on themselves, due to their blatant hypocrisy on certain issues. When a person thrusts themselves into situations that get attention, it stands to reason those that are offended by the integrity of certain messengers, you will see ridicule. And rightly so, in my view.

About Me

I am a political independent that belongs to no political party. I base my political ideology solely on principle, and not by daily talking points.
I am a non-denominational Christian that belongs to no church. I have incorporated many different beliefs into my personal theology and rely on no one entity to influence my personal beliefs.
Above all, I am a free thinker and value the right and ability to express my thoughts, without fear and regret.

Comment Policy

All comments are welcome, regardless whether they are in agreement with the opinions expressed here or not. The only rule is that we keep them directed and confined to the argument being made. This means no personal attacks directed towards another poster.

Most of the time, I try to acknowledge comments. But if I do not respond to one, please do not be offended. Sometimes, a comment says it all and there is nothing more I can add to it. Other times, I may be too busy in my real world to respond, appropriately.

Either way, know that all views are welcome. And as always, thank you for reading PYY.